From: | Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
Cc: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Fabien COELHO <coelho(at)cri(dot)ensmp(dot)fr>, Tomáš Vondra <tomas(dot)vondra(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Developers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: extend pgbench expressions with functions |
Date: | 2015-12-17 04:59:20 |
Message-ID: | CAB7nPqQ=AxZOuY5Vqn3__TWVCnbr_NBKseLaHZELZvu9E6Mi0w@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, Dec 17, 2015 at 1:54 PM, Alvaro Herrera
<alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
> Michael Paquier wrote:
>> On Wed, Dec 16, 2015 at 6:10 AM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>> > On Mon, Dec 14, 2015 at 7:25 AM, Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>> >> I have looked for now at the first patch and finished with the
>> >> attached while looking at it. Perhaps a committer could look already
>> >> at that?
>> >
>> > It looks fine to me except that I think we should spell out "param" as
>> > "parameter" throughout, instead of abbreviating.
>>
>> Fine for me. I have updated the first patch as attached (still looking
>> at the second).
>
> hm, so this is to backpatch, not merely for master, yes?
I haven't thought about that as it is a cosmetic patch.. But yes
that's harmless to backpatch to 9.5, and it would actually be good to
get a consistent code base with master I guess.
--
Michael
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Amit Kapila | 2015-12-17 05:33:26 | Re: parallel joins, and better parallel explain |
Previous Message | Michael Paquier | 2015-12-17 04:57:48 | Re: extend pgbench expressions with functions |